No. 287.
Mr. Cushing to Mr. Fish.
Legation of the United States,
Madrid, October 20,
1875. (Received November 8.)
No. 614.]
Sir: I annex hereto copy and translation of a
note just received from the minister of state in reference to the
investigation of Burriel, and the other implicated authorities of
Santiago de Cuba, and copy of my reply.
The Conde de Casa-Valencia, you perceive, states that the preliminary
formalities in the matter have been fulfilled, that is—as I understood
the matter in the light of what Mr. Castro said to me on the subject—
the administrative examination of the subject by the council of state to
the conclusion of recommending legal process. The ministers of war and
marine are now to act respectively as to the officers of the army and
those of the navy.
I will at an early day transmit to you legal details regarding the whole
procedure.
You will observe that the minister of state, in reference to the previous
notes of mine recapitulated in my note to him of the 4th instant,
[Page 523]
says: “and to which replied successively Messrs. Ulloa and Castro.” This
phrase appeared to me to go a little beyond the mark, and to imply
(contrary to the fact) that my notes to Mr. Ulloa of June 27, 1874, and
of September 24, 1874, had all received
contestation.
And, as the parallel between the massacres of Santiago de Cuba and those
of Olot, Cuenca, and Estella, drawn in my note of the 24th of September,
1874, had not been disputed at the time it was presented, it seemed to
me out of season on the part of the Conde de Casa-Valencia to raise the
issue now, incidentally, in response to the simple retrospective
allusion to the point contained in my note of the 4th inst.
Hence the observations on the subject contained in my last note.
* * * * * * *
Complaining bitterly, as Madrid does, at every act of military execution
on the part of the Carlists, which acts have never done the least good
to the cause of D. Carlos either as retaliation or as terror, it might
be really beneficial to right-minded Spaniards to be compelled to see
that neither have similar acts of passionate violence of theirs in Cuba
done the least good to their cause either as
retaliation or terror, while involving Spain in a series of perilous
controversies with Great Britain, France, and the United States.
* * * * * * *
I have, &c.,
[Inclosure 1 in No.
614.—Translation.]
The Conde de
Casa-Valencia to Mr. Cushing.
Minister of
State, The
Palace, October 17,
1875. (Received October 19.)
Your Excellency:
Sir: I have received the note of your
excellency, of date 4th instant, wherein you are pleased to state to
me that you have instructions from the Government of the United
States to call the attention of that of His Majesty the King to the
delay which has occurred, on the part of Spain, in the execution of
one of the clauses agreed upon in the protocol signed in Washington
by the minister plenipotentiary of Spain and the Secretary of State
of the American Republic, on the 29th of November, 1873, in
consequence of the question of the Virginius.
With this motive, your excellency is pleased to recall to mind the
notes which, on different occasions, from the time you took charge
of your legation until now, you had addressed to my predecessors in
this ministry, and to which replied successively Messrs. Ulloa and
Castro, confirming the engagement contracted and the constant
purpose of the Spanish government to carry into effect so soon as
the state of the general expediente in the
matter of the Virginius should permit it to proceed without embarras
ment to the special investigation referred to by what is stipulated
in the aforesaid protocol.
This case having arrived, and the legal formalities prescribed by
existing enactments having been now fulfilled, nothing opposes the
execution by the Spanish government of its agreement with that of
the United States, and with this object I have addressed myself to
my colleagues, the ministers of war and marine, to the end that,
resolving which ought to be the competent tribunal within the proper
jurisdiction of each one of those branches of the administration,
there be submitted thereto the examination and investigation of the
conduct of the authorities of Cuba who intervened in the process of
the Virginius, conformably with the stipulations in the protocol of
Washington.
General Burriel being one of the military authorities of Santiago de
Cuba, at the time when the capture of the Virginius took place, he
will, in such conception, be comprehended in the proceedings which
are ordered to be instituted; and it behooves me, in this relation,
to repeat to your excellency the assurances which were given to you
by my predecessor, Mr. Castro, that the actual rank of General
Burriel in the army will have no influence on the result of the
investigation which is now about to take place, as well as that his
official promotion in no wise prejudges his conduct in the events of
Cuba.
[Page 524]
This is not the occasion to examine or to judge those occurrences,
but I can do no less than state to your excellency that there is not
exactitude in comparing them with those which took place at Olot,
Cuenca, and Estella, which your excellency recalls in your note.
In acquainting your excellency with the resolution adopted by the
government of His Majesty, to the end of executing that which was
stipulated in the protocol of the 29th of November, I flatter myself
that the Government of Washington will behold therein the sincerity
wherewith Spain is accustomed to fulfill her engagements, and that
it will be persuaded, moreover, that the delays which this matter
has suffered hitherto have exclusively arisen from the state of the
general expediente of the Virginius, and from
the duty which was incumbent upon the government to await the
scrupulous observance of all the formalities which are exacted in
the progressive proceedings of this class of affairs.
I avail myself of this opportunity to reiterate to your excellency
the assurances of my most distinguished consideration.
EL CONDE DE CASA-VALENCIA.
The Minister Plenipotentiary of the United
States.
[Inclosure 2 in No.
614.]
Mr. Cushing to
the Conde de Casa-Valencia.
Legation of the United States of America,
Madrid, October 20, 1875.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge
reception of your excellency’s note of the 17th instant, in which
you inform me of the actual initiation of proceedings against the
authorities of Santiago de Cuba, in pursuance of the protocol of the
29th of November, 1873. It affords me great satisfaction to know
that this step, so long deferred by previous governments, has at
length been taken by that of His Majesty. It also affords me
satisfaction to receive renewed assurance that the recent promotion
of D. Juan Burriel will constitute no obstacle to the full
examination of his participation in the inculpated acts, as, indeed,
I already fully believed, in reliance on th£ declaration of his
excellency Mr. Castro, and the recognized honorability and good
faith of His Majesty’s government.
I doubt not the step thus taken, and the related assurances given by
His Majesty’s government, will afford the same satisfaction to my
Government, to which your excellency’s note has been promptly
transmitted with appropriate commentaries.
Incidental expressions in that note would seem to imply that all my previous notes to the ministry of
state on this subject had been replied to, which compels me to ask
myself whether I had been, perchance, laboring under a
misapprehension, in supposing, as indicated in my note of the 4th
instant, that no specific answer was ever made by any minister of
state to my note of the 24th of September, 1874, arguing the
culpability of D. Juan Burriel, and presenting reasons for his
arraignment and punishment by his government, or to so much of a
previous note of the 27th of June, 1874, as touched the same point.
If such misapprehension existed, it should and would be cheerfully
confessed, and the inferences founded thereon withdrawn.
I have, therefore, caused the files of the legation to be carefully
re-examined in this respect, and with the following results:
His excellency the minister of state for the time being replied,
under date of July 8, 1874, to so much of my note of the 27th of the
previous June as called in question the validity of D. Juan
Burriel’s plea in justification of his action at Santiago de Cuba,
assumed by him to be found in a certain order issued by General
Dulce, which his excellency Mr. Ulloa admitted had been repealed by
General Caballero de Rodas, and, therefore, did not constitute
justification in the premises; but he did not take issue with me on
the main question of the imputed demerits of D. Juan Burriel.
I am unable to discover that the particular considerations adduced in
my note of the 24th of September, 1874, to show why D. Juan Burriel
should be arraigned, were ever specifically met, or even that the
reception of that note was ever acknowledged.
The long and able argumentative note of his excellency Mr. Ulloa of
the 3d of December, 1874, was professedly and in fact in response to
a note of mine of July 21, 1874, consecrated to the distinct
question of the indemnities claimed for the officers and crew of the
Virginius shot at Santiago de Cuba.
In the same note, it is true, his excellency disposes of the
particular question of D. Juan Burriel; but in express response to
my note of November 30, 1874, alone.
Can it be that my note of the 24th of September, 1874, miscarried,
and by some untoward accident failed to reach the minister of state?
I should be sorry to find it so, for (sotto
voce, and without presumption, be it said) I had flattered
myself that the
[Page 525]
points it
presented were well put, first, in contending that the wholesale
executions in cold blood at Santiago de Cuba were worse than those of Olat, Cuenca, and Estella, since the
former were not only, like the latter, of unarmed men and of
prisoners, but, in addition to that, of non-combatants; and, secondly, because of the examples
exhibited by me of officers of equal (and even higher) category and
merit than D. Juan Burriel having been tried and (although for less
offenses) cashiered by the Government of the
United States at the instance of that of Spain.
I abstain, however, at the present apparently auspicious stage of
this protracted controversy from re-opening those questions; and I
beg pardon for having even touched upon them thus briefly in a note
of which the sole aim was originally, and the main object still is,
to express my own satisfaction and anticipate that of my Government
in view of the information contained in your excellency’s note; the
digression from which to a minor matter has been partly, it is true,
in discharge of my own conscience, but still more for the due
satisfaction of your excellency.
I avail myself of this occasion to reiterate to your excellency the
assurance of my most distinguished consideration.
His Excellency the Minister of
State.
